ATC170517: Report of Portfolio Committee on Police on the 2017/18 Budget, Annual Performance Plan and 2014 – 2019 Strategic Plan of the Civilian Secretariat for Police (CSP), Date 17 May 2017

Police

Report of Portfolio Committee on Police on the 2017/18 Budget, Annual Performance Plan and 2014 – 2019 Strategic Plan of the Civilian Secretariat for Police (CSP), Date 17 May 2017
 

The Committee examined the Budget, Annual Performance Plan for the 2017/18 financial year and the 2014-2019 Strategic Plan of the Civilian Secretariat for Police (CSP). The Committee reports as follows:

 

1. INTRODUCTION

The Civilian Secretariat for Police (CSP) derives its mandate from section 208 of the Constitution of South Africa, 1996 (Act No. 106 of 1996), which states that a civilian secretariat for the police must be established by national legislation to function under the direction of the Cabinet member responsible for policing. This also takes cognisance of section 206 of the Constitution, which entitles provincial Members of the Executive Committee (MECs) to perform certain oversight functions relating to policing.

The legislative mandate of the Civilian Secretariat is laid out in the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service Act, 2011 (Act No. 2 of 2011). The Act was promulgated on 01 December 2011 and provides for the Secretariat to provide advice to the Minister of Police. The Civilian Secretariat became a designated department on 1 April 2014 in terms of the Act, but its 2016/17 budget was still presented as part of the SAPS budget in the Estimate of National Expenditure 2016.

 

1.1 Structure

The Report provides an overview of the 2017/18 Budget Hearings of the CSP and is divided into the following sections:

Section 1: Introduction. This section provides an introduction to this Report as well as a summary of meetings held during the hearings.

Section 2: Key concerns of the Committee during the 2016/17 financial year. This section provides a summary of the key concerns raised by the Committee during the previous financial year.

Section 3: Strategic Priorities of the CSP for the 2017/18 financial year. This section provides a summary of the strategic focus areas for the Secretariat for the year under review.

Section 4: CSP Budget and Performance targets for 2017/18. This section provides an overall analysis of the estimates of national expenditure of the CSP for the 2017/18 financial year. This section also provides a programme analysis of the CSP.

Section 5: Committee observations. This section highlights selected observations made by the Portfolio Committee on Police on the annual performance targets and programme specific issues during the 2017/18 budget hearings and subsequent responses by the CSP.

Section 6: Recommendations and additional information. This section summarises the recommendations made by the Portfolio Committee on Police, as well as the additional information requested from the CSP.

Section 7: Conclusion. This section provides a conclusion to this Report.

 

The Committee received a briefing by CSP on the Strategic Plan, Annual Performance Plan and 2017/18 Budget on 5 May 2017.

 

2. KEY CONCERNS RAISED BY THE COMMITTEE DURING THE 2016/17 FINANCIAL YEAR

The following section provides a summary of the key observations/concerns raised by the Portfolio Committee on Police regarding performance and financial issues during the 2016/17 financial year:

Strategic Direction: The Committee was concerned about the role of the CSP and its mandate to develop policies that would contribute to more effective policing. Policies on demilitarisation and professionalism were urgent and the Committee wanted to know to what extent the CSF was able to influence the strategic direction of the SAPS with respect to models of policing and the aims of the NDP. The Department reported that they have been able to stabilise the Secretariat as there were lots of distortions in the environment. They have also embarked on a back to basics approach and consider themselves the organisational development arm of the SAPS. The CSP now have proper workplace skills plans, equity plans and have instituted an Audit and Risk Committee.  

 

National Forensics Oversight and Ethics Board: The Committee expressed its concern that during a presentation in February 2016, the members of the Forensics Board indicated that they did not have a ring-fenced budget. The Committee noted its concerns especially in view of the fact that the five civilian Board members were paying for their costs out of their own pockets. The Committee suggested that the Civilian Secretariat rectify the management of the situation as the Board was required to play a very important oversight role with respect to the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act, 2013 (Act No 37 of 2013). The Secretariat responded by indicating that by the time the Forensics Board was established, the MTEF was already finalised and that they have now to apply to the MTEC process for such funding in the next process. In the meantime, the CSP will cover travel and accommodation fees. The CSP has so far paid over R400 000 on travel and accommodation cost.

 

Leadership: The Committee raised its concerns that the Department was not stabilised in view of the change in leadership and the non-appointment of a permanent Secretary, CFO and Chief Director for the Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate. This brought into question the ability of the leadership to steady the ship and provide strategic direction to the Civilian Secretariat. The Committee questioned the delay in the finalisation of some of the posts that have been vacant for over 18 months. In response the Civilian Secretariat reported that all the posts were advertised and they were in the process of shortlisting candidates. The Secretariat also noted that there were three Secretaries (two Acting) in an 18 month period and they too wanted to stabilise the Department

 

Legislation: The Committee again raised its concerns that the intended pieces of legislation were not forthcoming which all affect the quality of police services. The Committee requested that the Secretariat stick to its deadlines as the SAPS Amendment Bill, the National Strategic Infrastructure Bill amongst others were priorities. The policy White Papers on Police and on Safety and Security at the time of the meeting were still not processed in Cabinet. The Acting Secretary reported that the two White Papers has in fact been to Cabinet Committees and were about to be placed before a full Cabinet meeting for ratification. The Department provided a full legislative programme to the Committee. The Department presented the National Critical Infrastructure Bill to the JCPS cluster and they recommended that it be processed for public comment. 

 

NDP Objectives: The Committee questioned whether the Department has taken on board all the NDP targets and to what extent the CSP was making sure that community participation and partnerships were at the centre of its work. The Secretariat responded by indicating that it convened a National Dialogue on Crime Prevention and that it has launched a campaign against police killing and crimes against women and children. Community outreach was a priority with respect to izimbizo convened to discuss crime. The National Police Board is also one of the goals of the NDP and the Secretariat is working to finalise the model through finalising a policy on the National Police Board. 

 

MTSF Targets: The Committee raised concerns about the attainment of MTSF targets during the 2918/19 FY when the targets must be achieved. The Committee noted its concern about the fact that the current targets were not well aligned with the MTSF targets and that not all MTSF targets were included in the Department’s 2016/17 APP.

 

APP Targets and Indicators: The Committee was concerned that the targets for the various indicators were low and not well thought through. There had been concerns about the 2016/17 APP and the fact that there were very few figures provided for targets and the Committee wanted the Secretariat to review the targets and indicators. The Committee was also concerned that the Departmental targets were below the MTSF targets. The CSF responded by indicating that the customer satisfaction surveys they intend to conduct , the safety audits and the Community Safety Forum assessments were all part of the MTSF targets. The CSF agreed to review the indicators and targets.

 

Community Police Forums and Community Safety Forums: The Committee noted that there has been little progress on the policies for Community Police Forums and that it has become critical for the Secretariat to finalise the matter of funding to CPFs and Community Safety Forums (CSFs). The Committee also wanted to know what co-ordination was taking place with other departments in respect of harnessing the support to CPF and CSFs. The Department reported that it is giving attention to the matter of strengthening the CPFs and will report to the Committee once it is finalised.

 

Monitoring Tool Costs: The Committee again expressed its concerns about the development costs for the monitoring tool. The matter has now dragged on a few years and the Committee was of the opinion that it should come to finality. The Secretariat reported that they were working very closely with Statistics South Africa to develop the tool and also had discussions with the Heads of Provincial Secretariats to align the approach and design.

 

Increase in advertising and contractor budget: The Committee noted that the budget allocations for advertising and contractors increased significantly and wanted an explanation for the increase. The Department reported that the increases in both line items of the budget were related to the calling for public comment and also public engagement contractors on the two White Papers and public comment and engagement.

 

ICT Capacity and Architecture: The Committee raised concerns about the independence of the CSP in relation to the police’s IT systems with respect to financial accounting. The Department stated that they were independent of the SAPS systems with respect to the PERSAL and BAS systems. They are currently doing the procurement manually because they require the LOGIS system to do procurement. The Department also informed that they will be developing their own knowledge and information centre portal and they have budgeted R4.7 million for a very comprehensive system.

 

Complaints management: The Committee noted that the area of complaints management is a weak area and that the CSP should consider developing better protocols when managing complaints. The Secretariat responded that they were currently referring complaints to the SAPS Inspectorate Division, but that they were reconsidering this and will report on it.

 

Domestic Violence Act compliance: The Committee questioned the efficacy of the Domestic Violence Act implementation administered by the CSP. In particular the SAPS’ implementation of the recommendations from the IPID was problematic because they did not investigate police men and women who are involved in domestic violence against their partners. The CSP indicated that they were giving the matters priority and reports in its quarterly assessments on compliance with the legislation by the police. The CSP intends to launch a customer satisfaction survey to gauge the perception of the communities on the compliance by the SAPS.

 

SAPS Structure: The Committee wanted to know what role the Secretariat was playing in the development of governance processes of the SAPS. In particular the structure of the SAPS has changed and the number of Lieutenant Generals had increased in the management structure. The Committee was concerned about the manner in which the Secretariat was able to influence such developments through its own research.  The Secretariat stated that they did not make any contribution to the restructuring of the SAPS as it was the prerogative and preserve of the Minister of Police. The Secretariat sometimes had to deal with court cases which the police were responsible for and they would be addressing these matters in the White Paper on Police.

 

3. STRATEGIC PRIORITIES OF THE CSP FOR 2017/18

The overall strategic goal of the Secretariat is to conduct civilian oversight over the police and provide the Minister of Police with strategic support (police advice, legislative support, public participation and monitoring and evaluation of the SAPS).

 

The Minister of Police has defined the strategic priorities of the Civilian Secretariat for Police in the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan. The priority is for the Civilian Secretariat to respond to policy shifts in the policing environment. Inclusive of the strategic priorities are the implementation of the White Paper of Safety and Security and the White Paper on Policing.

 

Another strategic goal is making sure that the building of the Information Technology infrastructure is developed and used effectively by the Secretariat in order to address the challenges of youth as perpetrators and victims of crime. The Ministry has emphasised that clearly defined partnerships to mobilise role-players and stakeholders to strengthen service delivery must be undertaken. These include investment in community policing forums.

 

The Strategic Plan of the Civilian Secretariat was reviewed to include the Farlam Commission recommendations and the implementation of the White Paper on Policing.

According to the 2016 ENE, the Secretariat is concerned that it did not achieve any of its targets to develop any policies and this affected its contribution to Outcome 3 which states that people in South Africa should feel and are safe and secure.

 

The Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) provides for the Secretariat’s strategic objectives to include the following:

1. Enhancing stakeholder and community participation in safety and crime prevention;
2. Developing policies for legislation for the effectiveness of the police service; and
3. Regular monitoring of the implementation of legislation, policies and regulations.

 

The National Development Plan proposes that crime prevention and detection should be carried out through an integrated approach between state and non-state institutions, with active involvement from civil society. The emphasis on community partnerships and citizen participation in the fight against crime is a strategic priority for the Secretariat.

As stated in the 2017 ENE, pursuant to the NDP goals, the Secretariat plans over the medium term to focus on: assessing the compliance of provinces with community policing forum guidelines; conducting a census in all police stations to assess service delivery by the SAPS; and finalising the implementation of the White Papers on Policing, Safety and Security.   

The outputs (strategic objectives) of the CSP are directly linked to the following Strategic outcome oriented goals (outcomes), as reflected in the CSP Strategic Plan for 2015-2020:

• Strategic Goal 1: A well-advised and supported Minister for a service-delivery oriented police service that is accountable.
• Strategic Goal 2: Quality. Timeous evidence-based strategic research, policy advice and legislative support to the Minister.
• Strategic Goal 3: Deepened public participation in the fight against crime.
• Strategic Goal 4: Enhanced accountability and transformation of the South African Police Service.

 

3.1 POLICY PRIORITIES FOR 2017/18

The CSP will focus on the following key priority projects for the 2017/18 – 2019/20 financial years:

• Repositioning of the CSP as the new Department of Police, which will require a new organisational structure;

• Organisational renewal and strategic leadership and the enforcement of the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service Act;
• Repositioning the CSP as the primary policy advisor to the Minister;
• Strengthen the capacity of the CSP to influence international developments for the Ministry of Police;
• Facilitate the creation of a smart or e-policing environment;
• Strengthening the Heads of Departments (HoDs) Forum and Senior Management Forum in order to monitor progress of the Department’s oversight functions;
• The establishment of self-directed project teams in order to give effect to the implementation of the plans;
• Development of a coherent Partnership, Marketing and Communication Strategy to strengthen engagements with key stakeholders and galvanise communities on crime prevention initiatives;
• Establishment of a Knowledge Information Management System as a nerve centre to drive the policy and strategic mandate of the Department;
• Building a strong Information Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure for the Department; and
• Development of an integrated human resource strategy.

 

 

4. CSP BUDGET AND PERFORMANCE TARGETS FOR 2017/18

4.1 Overall analysis

The overall budget allocation of the Secretariat increased from R110.5 million in 2016/17 to R124.6 million in 2107/18, which represents a nominal increase of 12.7%. The budgetary increase is equally spread across the four budget programmes of the Department, with the Legislation and Policy Development Programme receiving a slightly bigger percentage increase when compared to the other programmes. This will possibly bolster the capacity of the Programme to produce pieces or legislation and policing policies, which is one of the core mandates of the Department.

 

Table 1: CSPS Budget Allocation 2017/18

 

Programme			Budget	Nominal Increase / Decrease in 2017/18		Real Increase / Decrease in 2017/18	Nominal Percent change in 2017/18	Real Percent change in 2017/18
R thousand		2016/17	2017/18
Programme 1: Administration		42 898.0	48 051.0		5 153.0	2 305.2	12.01%	5.37%
Programme 2: Intersectoral Coordination and Strategic Partnerships		22 208.0	24 918.0		2 710.0	1 233.2	12.20%	5.55%
Programme 3: Legislation and Policy Development		24 430.0	28 114.0		3 684.0	2 017.8	15.08%	8.26%
Programme 4: Civilian Oversight, Monitoring and Evaluation		21 056.0	23 590.0		2 534.0	1 135.9	12.03%	5.39%
TOTAL		110 592.0	124 673.0		14 081.0	6 692.1	12.7%	6.05%
ECONOMIC CLASSIFICATION
Current Payments	108 855.0		122 973.0		14 118.0	6 829.9	12.97%	6.27%
Compensation of employees	79 444.0		88 815.0		9 371.0	4 107.3	11.80%	5.17%
Goods and services	29 411.0		34 158.0		4 747.0	2 722.6	16.14%	9.26%
Of which:
Advertising	1 164.0		383.0		- 781.0	- 803.7	-67.10%	-69.05%
Assets less than the capacitation threshold	1 825.0		2 790.0		965.0	799.6	52.88%	43.82%
Audit costs: External	936.0		763.0		- 173.0	- 218.2	-18.48%	-23.31%
Catering: Departmental activities	2 709.0		3 082.0		373.0	190.3	13.77%	7.03%
Computer Services	4 513.0		6 393.0		1 880.0	1 501.1	41.66%	33.26%
Consultants: Legal costs	60.0		99.0		39.0	33.1	65.00%	55.22%
Contractors	1 049.0		1 145.0		96.0	28.1	9.15%	2.68%
Inventory: Materials and supplies	138.0		36.0		- 102.0	- 104.1	-73.91%	-75.46%
Consumable supplies	282.0		329.0		47.0	27.5	16.67%	9.75%
Travel and subsistence	10 071.0		12 158.0		2 087.0	1 366.4	20.72%	13.57%
Venues and facilities	285.0		651.0		366.0	327.4	128.42%	114.88%
Transfers and subsidies	206.0		110.0		- 96.0	- 102.5	-46.60%	-49.77%
Capital Assets (Machinery and equipment)	1 531.0		1 590.0		59.0	- 35.2	3.85%	-2.30%
TOTAL	110 592.0		124 673.0		14 081.0	6 692.1	12.7%	6.05%

Source: National Treasury (2017)

                                                                                                      

In terms of economic classification, the following should be noted:

• The budget allocation towards advertising decreases significantly, from R1.16 million in 2016/17 to R383 thousand, which is a nominal decrease of 67.1%
• There is an increase in the budget allocation made to assets less than the capacitation threshold from R1.8 million in 2106/17 to R2.7 million in 2017/18, which represents a nominal increase of 52.8%.
• The budget allocation towards computer services increases from R4.5 million in 2016/17 to R6.3 million in 2017/18, which is a nominal increase of 41.6%.
• Even though the budget allocation towards consultants: legal costs, increases from R60 thousand in 2016/17 to R99 thousand in 2017/18, which is a nominal increase of 65%.
• The budget allocation for travel and subsistence increases from R10 million in 2016/17 to R12.1 million in 2017/18, which is a nominal increase of 20.7%.
• The budget allocation for venues and facilities increases from R285 thousand in 2016/17 to R651 thousand in 2017/18, which is a nominal increase of 128.4%.
• The allocation towards transfers and subsidies decreases nominally by 45.6% in 2017/18 when compared to the previous financial year. 

 

4.2 Programme Analysis

4.2.1 Programme 1: Administration

The programme provides administrative support, strategic leadership and management for the Secretariat. Its strategic objective is to enhance corporate governance in ensuring that the Secretariat achieve its mandate.

                        

The programme consists of the following sub-programmes: Department Management, Internal Audit, Finance Services, and Corporate Services.

The overall budget allocation of the Administration Programme increased from R42.1 million in 2016/17 to R48 million in 2017/18, which is a nominal increase of 12%. However, when taking inflation into consideration, the allocation only increases by 5.3% in 2107/18. The Finance Administration sub programme received the largest budgetary increase of 16.05% in 2017/18 compared to the previous financial year. The sub programme also receives the largest proportional allocation of all the sub programmes of the Administration Programme.

The lack of funding made to the Office Accommodation sub programme is a concern, as the Secretariat notes that their current office accommodation is unsafe and is a key risk indicator, and there is no indication that the lack of suitable accommodation will be addressed over the medium-term period.

 

Table: 2: Budget Allocation- Administration Programme

Programme	Budget		Nominal Increase / Decrease in 2017/18	Real Increase / Decrease in 2017/18	Nominal Percent change in 2017/18		Real Percent change in 2017/18
R thousand	2016/17	2017/18
Sub-programme 1: Department Management	8 387.0	9 277.0	890.0	340.2	10.61%	4.06%
Sub-programme 2: Corporate Services	13 481.0	14 965.0	1 484.0	597.1	11.01%	4.43%
Sub-programme 3: Finance Administration	16 808.0	19 505.0	2 697.0	1 541.0	16.05%	9.17%
Sub-programme 4: Office Accommodation	1.0	1.0	0.0	- 0.1	0.00%	-5.93%
Sub-programme 5: Internal Audit	4 221.0	4 303.0	82.0	- 173.0	1.94%	-4.10%
TOTAL	42 898.0	48 051.0	5 153.0	2 305.2	12.01%	5.37%
Economic classification
Current Payments	42 112.0	47 266.0	5 154.0	2 352.7	12.24%	5.59%
Compensation of employees	42 112.0	47 266.0	5 154.0	2 352.7	12.24%	5.59%
Goods and Services	33 332.0	37 263.0	3 931.0	1 722.6	11.79%	5.17%
of which (Selected):
Assets less that the capitalisation threshold	257.0	361.0	104.0	82.6	40.47%	32.14%
Audit Costs: External	936.0	763.0	- 173.0	- 218.2	-18.48%	-23.31%
Bursaries	155.0	250.0	95.0	80.2	61.29%	51.73%
Computer Services	2 283.0	4 034.0	1 751.0	1 511.9	76.70%	66.23%
Consultants	564.0	188.0	- 376.0	- 387.1	-66.67%	-68.64%
Consumable Supplies	171.0	231.0	60.0	46.3	35.09%	27.08%
Operating Leases	235.0	1.0	- 234.0	- 234.1	-99.57%	-99.60%
Venues and Facilities	170.0	72.0	- 98.0	- 102.3	-57.65%	-60.16%
Transfers and subsidies	127.0	110.0	- 17.0	- 23.5	-13.39%	-18.%t
Capital assets	659.0	675.0	16.0	- 24.0	2.43%	-3.64%
TOTAL	42 898.0	48 051.0	5 153.0	2 305.2	12.01%	5.37%

                                                                                                             Source: CSP (2017)

In terms of economic classification, the following should be noted:

• The allocation of assets less than the capitalisation threshold increases from R257 thousand in 2016/17 to R361 thousand in 2017/18, which is a nominal increase of 40.4%.
• The allocation for bursaries increases nominally by 61.29%.
• The allocation for computer services increases nominally by 76.7%.
• The allocation for consultants decreases nominally by 66.6%.
• The allocation for operating leases should be concerning, as effectively no funds were made available for operating leases in 2017/18.

 

The table below provides a summary of the programme performance indicators and targets of the Administration Programme for the 2017/18 financial year:

 

Table 3: Programme Performance Indicators and Targets: Administration Programme

Performance Indicator	2017/18 Target
Number of joint consultative IPID/ Secretariat forum meetings held per year in compliance with the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service Act, 2011	4
Number of quarterly performance reports against predetermined objectives submitted within 30 days after end of the quarter	4
Sub programme: Corporate Services The purpose of the sub programme is to provide reliable and efficient corporate services to the CSPS
Performance Indicator	2017/18 Target
Number of Workplace Skills Plans approved by the Secretary for Police Service	1
Reduced vacancy rate to 10% of the total post Establishment (New Indicator)	10% of total post establishment
An approved corporate governance of ICT Framework (New Indicator)	1
Sub programme: Finance Administration Provide Public Finance Management Act (PFMA)-compliant financial, accounting and supply chain services to the CSPS
Performance Indicator	2017/18 Target
Percentage of payments made to creditors within 30 days	95%
Percentage of Internal Audit recommendations implemented	100%
Percentage of external audit recommendations implemented
Percentage of expenditure in relation to Budget allocated	95%

                                                                                        Source: CSP 2017/8 APP

 

The CSP has removed the following performance indicators from the Administration Programme in the 2017/18 APP:

• Annual Report submitted and approved;
• Annual Performance Plan submitted and approved;
• Approved Equity Plan;
• Number of Human Resource Plans;
• Number of Demand Management Plans; and
• Indicator to measure the deviation between planned and actual spending.

 

The CSP has removed the entire Internal Audit sub-programme, together with all its targets, including the following:

• Submission of a Rolling Plan;
• Four (4) Signed Audit Reports submitted yearly;
• Approval of a Strategic Risk Register;
• Three (3) Audit Committee meetings held yearly; and
• Three (3) Risk Management meetings per year.

4.2.3 Programme 2: Intersectoral Coordination and Strategic Partnerships

2016/17 Budget allocations

The purpose of the Intersectoral Coordination and Strategic Partnerships Programme is to manage and encourage national dialogue on community safety and crime prevention.

The overall budget allocation of the Intersectoral Coordination and Strategic Partnerships Programme increases from R22.2 million in 2016/17 to R24.9 million in 20017/18, which is a nominal increase of 12.2%. The Intergovernmental, Civil Society and Public-Private Partnerships sub programme receives the bulk of the funding of Programme 2 at R22.1 million of the total allocation of R24.9 million, which is 88.7% of the total allocation of the programme. The Community Outreach sub programme receives a significantly smaller allocation of R2.7 million in 2017/18.

Table 4: 2016 Intersectoral Coordination and Strategic Partnerships Expenditure Estimates

Programme	Budget		Nominal Increase / Decrease in 2017/18	Real Increase / Decrease in 2017/18	Nominal Percent change in 2017/18	Real Percent change in 2017/18
R thousand	2016/17	2017/18
Sub-programme 1: Intergovernmental, Civil Society and Public-Private Partnerships	19 737.0	22 154.0	2 417.0	1 104.0	12.25%	5.59%
Sub-programme 2: Community Outreach	2 471.0	2 764.0	293.0	129.2	11.86%	5.23%
Total	22 208.0	24 918.0	2 710.0	1 233.2	12.20%	5.55%
Economic classification
Current Payments	21 889.0	24 632.0	2 743.0	1 283.2	12.53%	5.86%
Compensation of employees	15 402.0	17 219.0	1 817.0	796.5	11.80%	5.17%
Goods and Services	6 487.0	7 413.0	926.0	486.7	14.27%	7.50%
of which:
Advertising	40.0	60.0	20.0	16.4	50.00%	41.11%
Assets less than capitalisation threshold	791.0	0.0	- 791.0	- 791.0	-	-100.00%
Catering	1 915.0	2 157.0	242.0	114.2	12.64%	5.96%
Computer services	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	-	-
Consultants	162.0	171.0	9.0	- 1.1	5.56%	-0.70%
Contractors	162.0	171.0	9.0	- 1.1	5.56%	-0.70%
Consumables: Stationary, printing and office supplies	82.0	103.0	21.0	14.9	25.61%	18.17%
Operating leases	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	-	-
Travel and subsistence	2 291.0	3 781.0	1 490.0	1 265.9	65.04%	55.26%
Transfers and subsidies	47.0	0.0	- 47.0	- 47.0	-	-100.00%
Capital assets	272.0	286.0	14.0	- 3.0	5.15%	-1.08%
TOTAL	22 208.0	24 918.0	2 710.0	1 233.2	12.2%	5.55%

Source: 2017/18 CSPS APP

 

• In terms of economic classification, the following should be noted:
• The allocation for assets less than the capitalisation decreases by 100% from an allocation of R791 thousand in 2016/17 to no funding in 2017/18, especially in terms of the overall Departmental increase to this item.
• The decrease in the allocation to travel and subsistence will impact in the service delivery of the Secretariat.
• There are no funds allocated towards operating leases and transfers and subsidies for the Intersectoral Coordination and Strategic Partnerships Programme.

 

The table below summarises the programme performance indicators and targets of the Intersectoral and Strategic Partnerships Programme:

 

 

Table 5: Programme Performance Indicators and Targets: Intersectoral and Strategic Partnerships Programme

Sub programme: Intergovernmental, Civil Society and Public-Private Partnerships The purpose of the sub programme is to manage and facilitate intergovernmental, civil society and public partnerships
Performance Indicator	2017/18 Target
Number of memoranda of understanding (MoUs) signed with stakeholders in order to build safer communities	2
Number of anti-crime campaigns conducted per year	3
Number of CPF training programmes approved by the Secretary for Police Service	1
Number of izimbizo/public participation programmes held with communities to promote community safety	6
Total number of provinces implementing Community Police Forums Guidelines	9
Number of provincial capacity-building sessions held on crime prevention programmes (New Indicator)	9
Number of established CSFs (New Indicator)	20

                                                                                                      Source: CSP 2017/18 APP

 

4.2.4 Programme 3: Legislation and Policy Development 2016/17 Budget allocations

The purpose of the Legislation and Policy Development Programme is to develop policy and legislation for the police sector and to conduct research on policing and crime.

The overall allocation of the Legislation and Policy Development Programme has increased nominally by 15.1% in 2017/18 compared to the previous financial year. In 2016/17, the Programme received R24.4 million, which increased to R28.1 million in 2017/18. The Policy Development and Research sub programme received a slightly higher proportional budget increase compared to the Legislation sub-programme in 2017/18.

 

Table 6: Budget Allocation – Legislation and Policy Development Programme

Programme	Budget	Nominal Increase / Decrease in 2017/18		Real Increase / Decrease in 2017/18		Nominal Percent change in 2017/18		Real Percent change in 2017/18
R thousand		2016/17				2017/18
Sub-programme 1: Policy Development and Research	12 284.0	14 253.0	1 969.0		1 124.3		16.03%		9.15%
Sub-programme 2: Legislation	12 146.0	13 861.0	1 715.0		893.5		14.12%		7.36%
Total	24 430.0	28 114.0	3 684.0		2 017.8		15.08%		8.26%
Economic classification
Current Payments	24 065.0	27 764.0	3 699.0		2 053.5		15.37%		8.53%
Compensation of employees	16 355.0	18 285.0	1 930.0		846.3		11.80%		5.17%
Goods and services	7 710.0	9 479.0	1 769.0		1 207.2		22.94%		15.66%
of which:
Advertising	215.0	233.0	18.0		4.2		8.37%		1.95%
Assets less than the capitalisation threshold	1 160.0	1 984.0	824.0		706.4		71.03%		60.90%
Catering	558.0	677.0	119.0		78.9		21.33%		14.14%
Communication	536.0	619.0	83.0		46.3		15.49%		8.64%
Consultants	30.0	189.0	159.0		147.8		530.00%		492.66%
Contractors	742.0	816.0	74.0		25.6		9.97%		3.46%
Travel and subsistence	3 691.0	4 094.0	403.0		160.4		10.92%		4.34%
Operating payments	0.0	29.0	29.0		27.3		-		-
Transfers and subsidies	32.0	0.0	- 32.0		- 32.0		-		-100.00%
Capital assets	333.0	350.0	17.0		- 3.7		5.11%		-1.12%
TOTAL	24 430.0	28 114.0	3 684.0		2 017.8		15.1%		8.26%

Source: 2017/18 CSP APP

 

In terms of economic classification, the following should be noted:

• The allocation to Assets less than the capitalisation threshold increases from R1.16 million in 2016/17 to R1.98 million in 2017/18, which represents a nominal increase of 71.03%.
• Although not a large budget allocation was made to Consultants, it shows a significant increase from R30 thousand (R30 000) in 2016/17 to R189 thousand (R189 000.00) in 2017/18 and represents a nominal increase of 530%.
• There is no allocation towards Transfers and subsidies during 2017/18.

 

The table below summarises the programme performance indicators and targets of the Legislation and Policy Development Programme:

 

Table 7: Programme Performance Indicators and Targets: Legislation and Policy Development Programme

Sub programme: Policy Development and Research The purpose of the sub programme is to develop policies and undertakes research in areas of policing and crime
Performance Indicator	2017/18 Target
Number of policies on policing submitted to the Minister of Police for approval per year	3
Number of research reports on policing approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	2
Sub programme: Legislation The purpose of the sub programme is to provide legislative support services to the Minister
Performance Indicator	2017/18 Target
Number of Bills submitted to the Minister for approval per year	4

                                                                                                                        Source: 2017/18 CSP APP

 

4.2.5   Programme 4: Civilian Oversight, Monitoring and Evaluation

The purpose of the Civilian Oversight, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme is to oversee, monitor and report on the performance of the SAPS.

 

The overall budget allocation of the Civilian Oversight, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme increases from R21 million in 2016/17 to R23.59 million in 2017/18, which represents a nominal increase of 12.03% compared to the previous financial year. The Police Performance, Conduct and Compliance sub programme receives a nominal increase of 13.94% in 2017/18 when compared to the previous financial year, which is the largest proportional increase of the sub programmes located within the Civilian Oversight, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme.

 

Table 8: Budget Allocation – Civilian Oversight, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme:

 

Programme	Budget			Nominal Increase / Decrease in 2017/18		Real Increase / Decrease in 2017/18		Nominal Percent change in 2017/18		Real Percent change in 2017/18
R thousand	2016/17	2017/18
Sub-programme 1: Police Performance, Conduct and Compliance	15 247.0	17 373.0	2 126.0		1 096.4		13.94%		7.19%
Sub-programme 2: Policy and Programme Evaluations	4 761.0	5 073.0	312.0		11.3		6.55%		0.24%
Sub-programme 3: Information Management	1 048.0	1 144.0	96.0		28.2		9.16%		2.69%
Total	21 056.0	23 590.0	2 534.0		1 135.9		12.03%		5.39%
Current Payments	20 789.0	23 311.0	2 522.0		1 140.4		12.13%		5.49%
Compensation of employees	14 355.0	16 048.0	1 693.0		741.9		11.79%		5.17%
Goods and services	6 434.0	7 263.0	829.0		398.5		12.88%		6.19%
of which:
Assets less than the capitalisation threshold	164.0	249.0	85.0		70.2		51.83%		42.83%
Consultants	392.0	412.0	20.0		- 4.4		5.10%		-1.13%
Inventory: Materials and supplies	79.0	36.0	- 43.0		- 45.1		-54.43%		-57.13%
Travel and subsistence	3 001.0	3 146.0	145.0		- 41.5		4.83%		-1.38%
Venues and facilities	112.0	579.0	467.0		432.7		416.96%		386.33%
Capital Assets	267.0	279.0	12.0		- 4.5		4.49%		-1.70%
TOTAL	21 056.0	23 590.0	2 534.0		1 135.9		12.0%		5.39%

Source: 2017/18 CSP APP

In terms of economic classification, the following should be noted:

• The allocation to assets less than the capitalisation threshold increases from R164 thousand (R164 000.00) to R249 thousand (R249 000.00), which is a nominal increase of 51.8%.
• The allocation for venues and facilities increases from R112 thousand (R112 000.00) in 2016/17 to R579 thousand (R579 000.00) in 2017/18, which is a nominal increase of 416.96%.5.

The table below summarises the programme performance indicators and targets of the Civilian Oversight, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme:

 

 

 

Table 9: Programme Performance Indicators and Targets: Civilian Oversight, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme

 

Sub programme: Police Performance, Conduct and Compliance Monitoring The purpose of the sub programme is to Monitor the performance, conduct, compliance and transformation of the South African Police Service.
Performance Indicator	2017/18 Target
Number of oversight visits to police stations conducted per year	22
Number of Police Station Service Delivery Trends Analyses Reports approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	2
Number of SAPS Budget and Programme Performance Assessment Reports approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	1
Number of Assessments Reports on Complaints Management approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	1
Number of reports on SAPS Implementation of IPID Recommendations approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	1
Number of Compliance Monitoring Reports on the implementation of the Domestic Violence Act (98) by SAPS approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	2
Number of reports on the implementation and compliance to legislation approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	1
Number of Customer Satisfaction Survey Reports approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	1
Number of monitoring reports on police stations’ implementation of the school safety protocol approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year	2
Sub programme: Policy and Programme Evaluations The purpose of the sub programme is to Evaluate the effectiveness of programmes implemented by the South African Police Service.
Performance Indicator	2017/18 Target
Number of evaluation reports on the relevance and effectiveness of oversight initiatives approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year (Revised indicator)	1
Number of assessment reports on establishment and functionality of CSFs approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year (Revised indicator)	1
Number of assessment reports on establishment and functionality of CPFs approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year (Revised indicator)	1
Number of evaluation reports on Domestic Violence Act non-compliance, exploring causes and possible remedies approved by the Secretary for Police Service per year (New indicator)	1

                                                                                                          Source: 2017/18 CSP APP

 

5. COMMITTEE OBSERVATIONS

The Committee made the following observations on the strategic priorities of the Civilian Secretariat during the 2017/18 budget hearings:

 

5.1 General

Strategic Direction: The Committee noted that the strategic direction of the Civilian Secretariat for Police was to be repositioned as the Department of Police. This was due largely to the position of the Minister of Police and the Civilian Secretariat Act which places the Secretariat as the Minister’s Technical Adviser. The Minister is serviced by the Secretariat   In this respect the Secretariat indicated that everything with respect to policy would have to come through the Secretariat. It would be repositioned and the process of engagement with the value chain of policing will be changed. The Committee was concerned if the Secretariat has the resources and the management team to make this happen in the remaining time of the MTSF. This is the pen-ultimate year of the Medium Term Strategic Framework and delivery on the MTSF outcomes is expected.

 

Declaration of Interest: The Committee complimented the Secretariat for making the Declaration of Interest of senior management document available at short notice.

 

Performance Indicators and Targets: The Committee noted that after consultation with the Auditor General of South Africa, that some of the Secretariat performance indicators and targets were not well-defined such as visits to police stations. The purpose of the indicator was not clear. This was a matter which was previously raised with the Secretariat in terms of all its indicators in the Annual Performance Plan and the Committee cannot allow a repeat of this. The Secretariat was asked to remedy this situation.  

 

Legislation: The Committee noted that the SAPS Amendment Bill is not on the horizon and raised its concerns. It was pointed out that if no Bill is forthcoming from the Secretariat that the Committee would have to table a Committee Bill. This appeared to be the case with other pieces of legislation that have not been tabled in Parliament. The legislative programme of the Committee will be affected by the non-delivery and postponement of tabling of legislation.

 

State of Policing: The Committee welcomed the announcement of the Secretariat that it would develop a State of Policing document. It would go a long way in pinpointing the requirements of policing around the country and what was required to fix the challenges of public policing. The Committee was exposed to a similar process and document in its International Study Tour to the United Kingdom. The Committee would await the final report and interact with it at the time.

 

Process to appoint the SAPS National Commissioner: The Committee was concerned about the leadership stability of the SAPS and noted that the process to appoint a new National Commissioner should be developed and included in the SAPS Amendment Act. In view of the legislation not being made available, the process to appoint a new National Commissioner as per the proposal from the National Development Plan cannot be implemented if a new National Commissioner is appointed in the immediate future. It remains a very important tenant in promoting public confidence in the SAPS as an institution and the process to appoint the National Commissioner of Police must be subjected to a parliamentary process.   

 

Use of Force Policy: The Committee welcomed the new Use of Force Policy developed by the Civilian Secretariat. The Use of Force Policy would help in clearing up when force could be used by SAPS members and provide opportunity for reporting on the Use of Force by the SAPS to Parliament.

 

Vetting of staff members: The Committee noted that the majority of senior managers in the Civilian Secretariat are now vetted and that the vetting of lower level staff has not occurred. The performance indicators of the Department with respect to vetting of personnel does not indicate vetting as a performance indicator. The Committee is aware to the fact that the SAPS requires security clearance when it shares information with the Secretariat. The Secretariat is not getting the required co-operation from the State Security Agency in respect of this matter.

 

Over-crowding of building space: The Committee noted the concerns from the Secretariat that its building is overcrowded and the Department of Public Works has identified another building which the Secretariat intend to share with the Department of Arts and Culture. According the Secretariat, they should leave the Van Erkom building in June 2017 and are awaiting the final partitioning of the offices.

 

Cyber-crime and digital policing: The Committee noted that the Minister’s policy proposals include responding to cyber-crime through the use of ICT technology. The Committee has applauded the Secretariat’s commitment to use ICT and digital policing to fight cyber-crime. The Committee was concerned about the question of digital policing and that it requires substantial investment and will have consequences for the already stretched budget. The Committee has also noted that the Ministerial priorities have not been included in the APP and therefore not budgeted for, making it unattainable.   

 

Community Policing Forums (CPFs): The Committee has noted that the provision to deal with the community police forums are enshrined in the White Paper on Policing and the function of the CSP is to support the CPF’s. However, this can only be effected if the SAPS Act is amended.

 

Ring-fencing the budget of the DNA Board: The Committee has noted that the DNA Board is financed from the Secretariat’s budget and this has been a drain on the resources. The Secretariat has reported to the Committee that the budget for the DNA Board should be provided by Department of Finance and be ring-fenced. The Committee is of the view that the DNA Board is a critical player with respect to the implementation of the provisions of the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Act, 2013. The Committee therefore views the funding of the DNA Board as non-negotiable and has indicated to the Secretariat that it pursues the funding from Treasury.

 

6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

This section provides a summary of the recommendations made by the Committee and also a summary of the additional information requested during the 2017/18 budget hearings.

 

6.1 Additional information

The Committee requested additional information (to be submitted within six months) through written responses to supplement the information gathered during hearings on the 2017/18 budget hearings of the CSP:

• The Committee requested that the Secretariat provides it with a copy of the Use of Force policy.
• The CSP must submit a copy of its revised legislative schedule.
• The CSP must submit a written report on its capacitation plan and the filling of outstanding vacancies.
• The CSP must provide the Committee with a plan for the capacitation and support to CPFs and include which other departments are supporting the payment of CPFs programmes.

 

6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

The Committee made several recommendations to the CSP during the 2017/18 budget hearings. These included the following:

 

6.2.1 Budget recommendations:

1. The Committee recommends that the CSP should provide a budget plan for all the legislative structures functioning under its aegis and make submissions to National Treasury on the adequate funding of these structures such as the DNA Board and the DPCI Judge for the 2018/19 financial year.
2. The Committee recommends that the CSP reviews its APP indicators and targets with a view to making it relevant and well defined according to the SMART principles.
3. The Committee recommends that the Secretariat fills all the outstanding vacancies as the vacancy rate at the time of reporting stood at 18%.

 

6.2.2   Performance recommendations:

1. The Committee recommends that the Strategic Plan (2015-2020) and APP (2018/19) of the CSP performance targets should be relevant and well formulated. The Committee notes that the Minister’s priorities are not included in the APP and should therefore be included in the 2018/19 APP. 

 

1. The Committee recommends that the Civilian Secretariat delivers on the NDP with respect to demilitarisation, professionalisation and the institution of the National Police Board.

 

1. The Committee recommends that the CSP reviews all its targets to make sure that it aligns to the MTSF targets.

  

1. The Committee recommends that the Secretariat finalise its report on the State of Policing Report at the end of the fourth quarter and provide the Committee with the Report. 

 

1. The Committee recommends that the CSP should adhere to the legislative schedule submitted to the office of the Leader of Government Business in the National Assembly taking account of the entire process including possible delays, into account.  The Committee expects to be updated with any legislative programme changes.

 

1. The Committee recommends that the Department provides it with a quarterly progress report on re-positioning the Secretariat to become the Department of Police.

 

1. The Committee recommends that the Civilian Secretariat report on the activities of the Consultative Forum.

 

1. The Department should prioritise the SAPS Amendment Bill for delivery at the end of the 2017/18 financial year, failing which the Committee will table a Committee Bill.

 

• The Committee recommends that the Secretariat develops a policy proposal on the process for the appointment of the National Commissioner of Police.

 

1. The Committee recommends that the vetting process of all the staff of the Secretariat is completed, especially the junior staff members.

 

• The Committee recommends that the Secretariat improves co-operation with the Provincial Secretariats.

 

• The Committee recommends that the Secretariat prioritise and develop a policy proposal and study on e-policing and digital policing.

 

1. The Committee recommends that the State Security Agency continues to co-operate with the Secretariat and vets all staff members.

 

1. The Committee recommends that the Secretariat develops additional criteria for the declaration of interest forms for all policing agencies and includes all risk areas, gifts and sponsorships.

 

1. The Committee recommends that the Secretariat signs a MOU with the DNA Board and provides it with the necessary support.  

 

1. The Committee recommends that the Secretariat takes steps to improve the audit opinion of the AGSA.

 

7. CONCLUSION

The Committee notes the fact that the new Minister of Police has developed a new list of priorities for the Secretariat to enhance the fight against crime. The Committee supports the efforts of the Minister to reprioritise the Secretariat as the Department of Police. Leadership stability must be prioritised within the SAPS and the Secretariat must be empowered to support the Minister in this regard. The Committee welcomes the Secretariat’s commitment to complete the State of Policing Report and the Committee eagerly awaits the outcome of the research process.

 

The Portfolio Committee on Police supports the budget of the Civilian Secretariat for Police for 2017/18 as a Department within Vote 23 (Police) and recommends that the budget be adopted. The Democratic Alliance reserved its rights with respect to supporting or not supporting the budget vote.

 

Report to be considered.